A Failure of Compassion.

This is the time of year to think about the better qualities of humanity, such as charity and compassion. The problem is that some of us tend to get pretty depressed when we make an objective assessment of ourselves regarding these traits. I have extended family that I would rate very high on these factors. They are conscientious people who make significant efforts to consider the plights of those less fortunate than them. They organize benefits to address social ills, and invite people to their houses to participate in doing something good. These affairs not only bring local folks together, but they also contribute to meeting the vast needs of the poor and downtrodden. Mostly I admire them for doing something to help.

With Christmas coming, my in-laws are now trying to rethink traditions. Every year we have a gift exchange, and each person goes home with something that someone else brought. We set a money limit and even run a concurrent gag trade. This is not an uncommon practice, and saves us from having to buy presents for each individual separately. It also gives us something to do on the 24th of December. But this time around, my sister-in-law came up with an alternative suggestion. She sent out an e-mail documenting some of the terrible conditions that others face in third world countries. Her idea was that we skip the exchange this year, and donate the money we would have spent to the charity of our choice.

Obviously the birth of Christ should be celebrated with actions that run deeper than a consumerist orgy of spending. If we were truly honest in our faith and respect for the Son-of-God, we might strive to follow his philosophy and give to the less unfortunate. However this threatens to take the fun out of Xmas. Let's face it- we get a charge from taking home luxury items that we didn't buy ourselves, especially when we didn't even ask for them. Why would we give up these time-honored activities? Sure, there are people starving somewhere, but is that our problem? Don't we have enough to concern ourselves with during this period of economic downturn? Don't we have a responsibility to go out and shop in order to "save our nation"?

I'll freely admit that I'm not particularly charitable. I don't spend a lot of time thinking about the destitute and disease-afflicted in far flung lands. I won't even give pocket change to homeless Americans nowadays. At some level my perspective can be distilled to "better them than me". I'm not proud of that, yet I can't defend self-deception. I've said it before and I'll repeat it... humans aren't that special. They have no innate right to survival at the expense of other living creatures. And we perpetuate our survival by exploiting the Earth and all of its inhabitants. That's just the way it is. If I participate in sending food to a region that can't support its current population, who exactly am I serving?

And yet... my lack of so-called "humanity" occasionally gnaws at me. That's why, against my better instincts, I never bitch about paying taxes. I realize that a lot of that money goes into the pockets of corrupt and greedy politicians, and more of it feeds monolithic corporate interests, but at least there's a minimal amount being diverted to assist fellow citizens. I'm glad that there are people willing to sacrifice their time, resources, and energy to improve the lives of others. That type of self-abnegation is truly noble. I'm not going to fool myself- if I wasn't forced into this secular tithing (or is it more appropriately trithing?), I'd be more than happy to sock that money away. But when it comes to the holidays, I'm more likely to defend the status quo.

Why Are We Here?

Late last night I entered into a conversation that some would perceive as luxuriously self-indulgent, others would see as needlessly complex, and maybe a few would view as completely unnecessary. I don't remember the exact chain of expression that led to the question- but when I left to go home to sleep, I brought home with me what could be the ultimate existentialist query- "Why are we here?" Perhaps its very nature is one of folly. Obviously each individual carries with him/her a multitude of shifting answers to that question. One's response might be affected by an infinite number of transient variables. But in this particular discussion, my friend and I were searching for a "larger truth".

The mystery becomes somewhat less complex when we limit our consideration to ourselves. As Robert Anton Wilson would say, our perception is limited to our reality tunnel. Or maybe he would say that it at least appears to be so. It's only if we accept the existence of an external reality with any possibility of "objectivity" that a possible solution to this puzzle lies within our grasp. I'm not going to commit to an authoritative position on that issue. But for the purpose of identifying a direction for humanity, let us assume that a consensual reality is possible.

Our consideration necessitates a number of other assumptions as well. This is the tricky part, and involves a set of foundational beliefs on which there is clearly no social consensus. If you are a fundamentalist Christian you are going to have a very specific starting point. If we limit the discussion to premises consistent with the scientific tradition, then we begin from a wholly different place. Last night we confined the thread of our talk to the latter. Therefore we started with the theory of the "Big Bang" origination of the universe. Neither of us are trained in physics, and so we had to rely on a very rudimentary set of definitions. At some point in the past we agreed that there was dispersal of energy into the time and space of what we refer to as "the universe".

That energy eventually transformed into particles of matter, some of which we interact with on a daily basis here on Earth. We have also made a qualitative distinction in order to classify certain conglomerations or manifestations of this matter- certain examples we refer to as "organic", and others we call "inorganic". This may appear to be an entirely arbitrary classification through the perception of non-human entities, but for our purposes it will have to temporarily serve. Over the last several hundred years certain representatives of our "species" have developed a structured hierarchy, at the top of which (not surprisingly) humans reside. And we are rewarded this privileged position by dint of our "consciousness".

But this concept of "consciousness" is even more amorphous than all the other elements from which we've constructed our underlying premises. This is where we discover the most divergence of opinion and belief. This is the realm of "philosophers"- a group of people (traditionally white men) who have occupied a refined and received seat of learning... an entitlement only made possible by other groups of people laboring to provide the survival necessities of these lucky few. It has been the convention for "ordinary people" to defer to their convictions regarding the nature and meaning of "consciousness". Perhaps their very existence is enough to refute the countervailing forces of "determinism"- which would discount the whole concept of "consciousness" as a myth.

Regardless, the game we have now allowed ourselves to engage in (without proper education or training) is called "Why are we here?" My friend and I were apostates, rejecting the convention that dictates that we look to spiritual authorities or worldly leaders to determine this issue for us. Was it merely by coincidence that we had discovered ourselves trodding on this sacred ground? Maybe the solution to the mystery lies in the question itself. Could it be that the reason "We are here" is to search and explore in a quest to arrive at our own answers? It appears to be cyclical logic, doesn't it? That reminds me of a Zen koan, but I can't tell you about it here....